[Birdbycatch] IUCN population conservation status changes discussed

Sat, 26 Apr 2003 15:34:56 -0700

--=====================_26637343==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Listed below are postings from the BirdLife International Threatened=20
Seabird Forum=20
<http://isuzu49.webcrossing.com/WebX?13@103.IOT9a9FMaGV.46@.2cba2669>=20
regarding a need to re-examine current classifications of seabirds that=20
appear to be undergoing global population declines. I've only included here=
=20
those listed on the forum that have known or probable (long-billed=20
murrelet) interactions with fisheries. Are there other species that should=
=20
be considered for re-classification on the IUCN Red List?

Information on current population status classification definitions under=20
the IUCN system (International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural=
=20
Resources <http://www.iucn.org/>) can be found on the IUCN Red List=20
Categories and Criteria site at=20
<http://www.redlist.org/info/categories_criteria2001.html>. There are 5=20
major categories for extant species in which data is available: Critically=
=20
Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable, Near Threatened, and Least Concern. The=
=20
categories listed in the IUCN Red List are globally-classified, so there=20
may be more severe regional classifications than are listed below. The=20
species listed below are in addition to the posting forwarded on 24 April=20
about the Laysan Albatross (Least Concern to Threatened - Critically=20
Endangered) and Sooty Albatross (Threatened - Vulnerable to Threatened -=20
Endangered).

Black-footed Albatross: Vulnerable to Endangered

Black-footed Albatross is currently classified as Vulnerable on the basis=20
of a projected 20% decline over the next three generations (60 years). New=
=20
analysis of generation length reveals that species has a generation length=
=20
of 18.8 years (based on a median age of first breeding of 7 years and an=20
adult survival rate of 91.5%). Three generations is thus ca. 56 years.=20
Lewison and Crowders (in press) predict that under a moderate case scenario=
=20
(based on current bycatch of this species in longline fisheries) this=20
species will experience a 60% decrease in numbers over the next three=20
generations.This would thus trigger the A3(d) criterion, calling for this=20
species to be classified as endangered. Any comment on this assessment, and=
=20
any other relevant information, would be greatly appreciated.

Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross: Near Threatened to Critically Endangered

The Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross Thalassarche chlororhynchos is=20
currently classified as Near Threatened, nearly meeting criteria A1d, A2d=20
(declines of >30% in 10 years or three generations). The generation length=
=20
in this species is estimated to be 22 years (based on data in Cuthbert et=20
al. in prep), so the appropriate trend period is 66 years. Cuthbert et al.=
=20
(in prep.) present population models based on data from 1981-2001 which=20
suggest annual rates of decrease of up to 2.8% on Gough Island and 5.5% on=
=20
Tristan da Cunha, which are most likely to have resulted from low adult and=
=20
immature survival, presumed to be caused by fisheries bycatch. The=20
population on Gough was estimated to be 5,250 pairs in the 2000/2001=20
breeding season. The population on Tristan da Cunha was estimated to be=20
21,600-35,600 pairs in the 1980s but may have declined since then=20
(Richardson 1984, Fraser et al. 1988, Ryan and Moloney 2000).

Under the A criterion, trends can be estimated over a period in the past=20
(A2), future (A3), or during a timeframe that encompasses both past and=20
future (A4). Given that trends are unknown prior to 1982, that the threat=20
of long-lining is relatively recent, and that it is difficult to predict=20
the extent of this threat 66 years (three generations) from now, it seems=20
sensible to use the A4 criterion, and extrapolate known decline rates into=
=20
the future to give a total period equivalent to three generations. The data=
=20
from Cuthbert et al. (in prep.) have been used to generate the table in the=
=20
attached document in order to do this.

This suggests that the total population may therefore decline by 93.8-95%=20
over the period 1982-2048 (three generations), hence triggering the A4=20
criterion at the Critical level. Comment on this is welcome, as are further=
=20
data relating to population sizes or trends, or to bycatch mortalities for=
=20
this species.

Indian Yellow-nosed Albatross: Vulnerable to Endangered

This species is currently classified as Vulnerable due to a 20% decline=20
over the last 60 years (three generations). Studies indicate that this=20
decline is likely to continue in the future. New analysis of generation=20
length reveals that species has a generation length of 23.7 years. This is=
=20
based on a median age of first breeding of 9 years and an adult survival=20
rate of 93.2% (extrapolation from the mean of 4 congeners). Three=20
generations is thus ca. 71 years. Published population trends for the major=
=20
colonies (attachement) were used to calculate the global population trend=20
over the next three generations. This reveals a projected decline in the=20
population of 62% over the next three generations thus triggering criterion=
=20
A4 (a), calling for the species to classified as endangered. These trends=20
are substantiated by known levels of bycatch of this species in longline=20
fisheries. Indian Yellow-nosed albatrosses are killed in substantial=20
numbers in at least five longline fisheries (Nel & Talyor in litt). Any=20
comment on this assessment, and any other relevant information, would be=20
greatly appreciated.

Black-browed Albatross: Vulnerable to Endangered

This species has recently been upgraded to vulnerable on the basis of=20
confirmed declines in its major stronghold, the Falkland Islands. From=20
this, it is inferred that it has declined by c.40% over the last 30 years=20
(three generations), probably owing to mortality caused by longline=20
fisheries. There are currently few world sites where it is increasing. It=20
is therefore inferred to have declined by >30% overall during this same=20
time period and projected that such declines will continue into the future.=
=20
New analysis of generation length reveals that species has a generation=20
length of 21.5 years (based on a median age of first breeding of 9 years=20
and an adult survival rate of 92%). Three generations is thus ca. 65 years.=
=20
The published population trends for the major colonies (attachment) were=20
used to calculate the global population trend over the next three=20
generations. This reveals a projected decline in the population of 62% over=
=20
the next three generations thus triggering criterion A4 (a), calling for=20
the species to classified as endangered. These trends are substantiated by=
=20
known levels of exploitation. Black-browed Albatrosses are one of the most=
=20
frequently caught species in at least 21 longline fisheries conducted by 11=
=20
different countries (Nel & Taylor in litt). Furthermore, this species is=20
also vulnerable to being killed in considerable number in trawl fisheries=20
around the Falkland Islands (Sullivan pers. comm.). Any comment on this=20
assessment, and any other relevant information, would be greatly=
 appreciated.

Sooty Shearwater: Least Concern to Vulnerable

The Sooty Shearwater Puffinus griseus is currently listed as Least Concern.=
=20
It breeds in New Zealand and satellite islands (c.5 million pairs),=20
Australia (colonies on 17 islands all <1000 pairs), southern Chile (many=20
colonies, some up to 200,000 pairs) and the Falklands (10,000=9620,000=20
pairs). Although this is an extremely numerous species with a population=20
perhaps exceeding 20 million birds, there are persistent signs of current=20
decline (information compiled by M. Brooke for a forthcoming OUP monograph=
=20
on the family). In New Zealand, the number of burrows in the largest colony=
=20
(on the Snares islands) declined by 37% between 1969-1971 and 1996-2000,=20
and burrow occupancy may also have declined, indicating that an overall=20
population decline may have occurred (Warham and Wilson 1982, Scofield=20
2002). Elsewhere the mainland New Zealand colonies are in decline and=20
certain offshore colonies have not responded to predator control (Gaze=20
2000, Jones 2000). In the California Current, Sooty Shearwater numbers have=
=20
fallen by 90% in the last 20 years (Veit et al. 1996, 1997). It remains=20
uncertain whether this has resulted from population declines or=20
distributional shifts (Spear and Ainley 1999). If there is a large-scale=20
decline underway, it is unlikely to be due to the 'muttonbirding' that=20
currently accounts for around a quarter of a million of birds annually.=20
Populations are no longer ravaged by pelagic drift-nets which formerly=20
drowned up to 350,000 birds annually (Ogi et al. 1993). While the species=20
is killed by fisheries (Taylor 2000), it is not obvious that the mortality=
=20
is sufficient to account for the population decrease. It is for this reason=
=20
that the decline has been associated with profound climate changes (Veit et=
=20
al. 1996). If declines of >30% have been mirrored outside the Snares, then=
=20
this species would qualify as Vulnerable (A2b,d; A3b,d). Do such declines=20
seem reasonable?

Flesh-footed Shearwater: Least Concern to ?: Undergoing declines

Flesh-footed Shearwater Puffinus carneipes is currently classified as Least=
=20
Concern. However, recent information from eastern Australia (B. Baker in=20
litt. 2002) has suggested that bycatch from the expanding tuna fishery may=
=20
be significant, with 5,000-6,000 individuals being killed annually. These=20
birds are likely to have derived from the Lord Howe island population,=20
which anecdotal reports suggests may have declined in recent years=20
(alternatively, they may be from populations breeding in New Zealand, which=
=20
number 25,000-50,000 pairs). As the total Lord Howe island population=20
numbers 20,000-40,000 breeding pairs, these levels of mortality are clearly=
=20
significant. Fishing effort in western Australia has also increased in=20
recent years, with unknown effects on this species (the western population=
=20
numbers 100,000-200,000 pairs at >30 colonies). Barry Baker and Brent Wise=
=20
are currently developing population models for this species, but=20
information and comment from other sources would be welcome.

Marbled Murrelet: Vulnerable to Endangered

The Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus is currently listed as=20
Vulnerable (A1a,b,c,d,e; A2b,c,d,e) because, although it is still abundant,=
=20
it has undergone a rapid population decline owing to a variety of threats.=
=20
There is some suggestion that large numbers nest in non-forest areas, and=20
thus are not threatened by logging of old-growth forest. Estimates of the=20
proportion of the population (or estimates of numbers of individuals)=20
nesting in non-forest areas are required. The analysis in 2000 assumed the=
=20
default trend period of 10 years. However, generation length in this=20
species is 11.6 years (data from Beissinger 1995 and Cam et al. in prep),=20
yielding a trend period for three generations of 35 years. In Alaska there=
=20
was a 50% decline in 1972-1992 (Piatt and Naslund 1995), and a 40% decline=
=20
in 1982-1992 in parts of British Columbia (Kelson et al. 1995). Declines in=
=20
Alaska have continued since 1991 in Prince William Sound and Glacier Bay=20
(results from models by B. Manly; K. Kuletz in litt 2002); a decline of 44%=
=20
(from 80,000 to 53,000 birds) was reported in Prince William Sound in=20
1996-2000 (Stephensen et al. 2001) [Marine birds and sea otter population=20
abundance of Prince William Sound, Alaska: trends following the T/V Exxon=20
Valdez Oil Spill]; and a 30% decline in numbers was found in 1992-2002=20
along the Yakutat/Malaspina Forelands (K. Kuletz in litt. 2002).=20
Unfortunately these data are too incomplete to compile them in order to=20
estimate complete overall population declines. The four decline rates=20
presented here, when converted to trends over 35 years, equate to declines=
=20
of 70%, 72%, 97% and 71%, and hence the species may qualify as Endangered=20
(50-80% declines over three generations).

[U.S. and Canada have federally listed West Coast populations as=20
threatened. They nest exclusively in old growth forest in the Pacific=20
Northwest, which is under intense pressure from logging.]

Kittlitz' murrelet: Least Concern to Critically Endangered

Kittlitz=92s Murrelet Brachyramphus brevirostris is currently listed as=
 Least=20
Concern (with a global population of 30,000-130,000 individuals estimated=20
in 1996; del hoyo et al. 1996), but its status may deserve to be elevated=20
based on the following information from K. Kuletz (in litt. 2002). The=20
Alaskan population (70% of the total) was estimated to be 9,000-25,000=20
birds in 2002. It is known to have undergone population declines in three=20
important population centers: 1) In Prince William Sound the population=20
declined by 84% between 1989 (6,436 birds) and 2000 (1,033 birds); 2) In=20
Malaspina Forelands, numbers declined by 38-75% in 1992-2002; In Icy Bay,=20
at the north end of this 80 km stretch of coast, surveys in 2002 revealed a=
=20
population of c.2,220 birds; 3) In Glacier Bay, density estimates for=20
identified brevirostris declined by 89.1% in 1991-2000, with c.2,200 birds=
=20
estimated in 1999-2000. There are no trend data from other parts of the=20
species' range, but anecdotal information suggests population declines are=
=20
occurring in at least some of these other areas. Taking the same generation=
=20
length as the congeneric Marbled Murrelet B. marmoratus , the relevant=20
trend period under the IUCN criteria is 35 years. Taking the three declines=
=20
listed above, and extrapolating them into the future to give a trend period=
=20
of 35 years, yields predicted declines of 99.6-99.9% over 35 years. This=20
would qualify the species as Critical under criteria A4b,c,d,e, assuming=20
that the Alaskan declines have been mirrored for the 30% of the population=
=20
found in Russia. Threats are hypothesised to include: 1. Habitat loss and=20
degradation due to oceanic regime shifts and glacial retreat, possibly as a=
=20
consequence of global warming; 2. Habitat degradation and repeated=20
disturbance of birds due to recreational and commercial tour boat traffic;=
=20
3. Mortality in gillnet fisheries (documented in Prince William Sound;=20
anecdotal accounts from elsewhere; 4. Mortality from petroleum=20
contamination: 500-1,000 (7-15% of the Prince William Sound population)=20
died as result of the ExxonValdez oil spill. Comment on this assessment=20
would be welcome.

Long-billed Murrelet: ?

The Long-billed Murrelet Brachyramphus perdix (which breeds in Japan=20
through the Sea of Okhotsk to the Kamchatka peninsula) was split by Friesen=
=20
et al. (1996) [Condor 98: 681-690] from Marbled Murrelet B. marmoratus=20
(which breeds in California to the Aleutian Islands). The population is=20
estimated to number in the tens of thousands (Konyukhov and Kitaysky 1995,=
=20
from which the following information is taken) [Pp 23-29 in Ralph et al.=20
Ecology and conservation of the Marbled Murrelet]. In Japan, it is rare in=
=20
eastern Hokkaido, but commoner on the Sea of Okhotsk coast, especially near=
=20
the Shiretoko peninsula. There are few areas in Russia where the species is=
=20
considered common: the lower Amur River area, particularly between Baydukov=
=20
island and Aleksandra bay; near Magadan along the Khmitievsky peninsula,=20
Tauyskaya bay, and the Koni peninsula; and on the Kamchatka peninsula. It=20
appears to be uncommon in the Primorye region and on Sakhalin island (where=
=20
its distribution is patchy), and it is rare on the northern coast of the=20
Sea of Okhotsk. Like Marbled Murrelet, this species is under increasing=20
threat from logging of old growth forests which has accelerated in recent=20
years, particularly on Sakhalin island and the Kamchatka peninsula.=20
Intensive development of the oil industry has occurred on the Okhotsk and=20
Bering Sea shelves, and this provides a further potential threat. Assuming=
=20
the generation length is the same as in Marbled Murrelet (11.6 years), the=
=20
appropriate trend period is 35 years. Should this species be classified as=
=20
Near Threatened, almost meeting criteria A2c,e (decline >30% in 35 years)=20
and perhaps C1 (population <10,000 individuals and decline >10% in 35=
 years)?

Xantus' Murrelet: Vulnerable to ?

Xantus's Murrelet Synthliboramphus hypoleucus is currently listed as=20
Vulnerable (B1+2d,e; C1) because it has a small range (Extent of Occurrence=
=20
=3D 300 km2), and because it has a small population (5,600 individuals)=
 which=20
is declining. Conservation action is beginning to have some positive=20
effects as introduced predators are eradicated from colonies. What is the=20
latest population estimate for this species? Have any sites been=20
recolonised, or new colonies discovered?

Red-legged Kittiwake: Vulnerable to ?

The Red-legged Kittiwake Rissa brevirostris is currently listed as=20
Vulnerable (A1a) owing to a rapid decline from 259,000 individuals in the=20
mid 1970s to c.168,000 in the mid-1990s. The main population now seems to=20
have stabilised (Dragoo et al. 2000, 2001) [Breeding status and population=
=20
trends of seabirds in Alaska in 1999; ditto 2000]. In 2000 it was=20
recommended that if declines do not recommence, then this species should be=
=20
downlisted to Near Threatened. However, the analysis in 2000 used the=20
default trend period of 10 years under the IUCN criteria. Generation length=
=20
in the congeneric Black-legged Kitiwake R. tridactyla is 14 years (mean age=
=20
at first breeding =3D 4 years; mean annual survival =3D 90.5%), giving a=
 trend=20
period of 42 years. Assuming that the population had been stable prior to=20
the mid-1970s, the overall decline over this period is 35.2%. Hence the=20
species would still qualify as Vulnerable (A2b) under the revised IUCN=20
criteria, and would remain so for quite some time into the future. The key=
=20
issue is therefore: can age at first breeding and annual survival for=20
Black-legged Kittiwake be extrapolated to this species?

Elizabeth Mitchell
P.O. Box 933
Eugene, Oregon 97440
U.S.A.
Tel: 541/ 935-0858
Message Tel: 541/344-5503
E-mail: emitch@efn.org

 =20
--=====================_26637343==_.ALT
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<html>
Listed below are postings from the BirdLife International Threatened
Seabird Forum
&lt;<a=
 href=3D"http://isuzu49.webcrossing.com/WebX?13@103.IOT9a9FMaGV.46@.2cba2669=
" eudora=3D"autourl">http://isuzu49.webcrossing.com/WebX?13@103.IOT9a9FMaGV.=
46@.2cba2669</a>&gt;
regarding a need to re-examine current classifications of seabirds that
appear to be undergoing global population declines. I've only included
here those listed on the forum that have known or probable (long-billed
murrelet) interactions with fisheries. Are there other species that
should be considered for re-classification on the IUCN Red List? 
 
Information on current population status classification definitions under
the IUCN system (International Union for Conservation of Nature and
Natural Resources &lt;http://www.iucn.org/&gt;) can be found on the IUCN
Red List Categories and Criteria site at
&lt;<a href=3D"http://www.redlist.org/info/categories_criteria2001.html"=
 eudora=3D"autourl">http://www.redlist.org/info/categories_criteria2001.</a>=
<a href=3D"http://www.redlist.org/info/categories_criteria2001.html" eudora=
=3D"autourl">html</a>&gt;.
There are 5 major categories for extant species in which data is
available: Critically Endangered, Endangered, Vulnerable, Near
Threatened, and Least Concern. The categories listed in the IUCN Red List
are globally-classified, so there may be more severe regional
classifications than are listed below. The species listed below are in
addition to the posting forwarded on 24 April about&nbsp; the Laysan
Albatross (Least Concern to Threatened - Critically Endangered) and Sooty
Albatross (Threatened - Vulnerable to Threatened - Endangered). 
 
Black-footed Albatross: Vulnerable to Endangered 
 
Black-footed Albatross is currently classified as Vulnerable on the
basis of a projected 20% decline over the next three generations (60
years). New analysis of generation length reveals that species has a
generation length of 18.8 years (based on a median age of first breeding
of 7 years and an adult survival rate of 91.5%). Three generations is
thus ca. 56 years. Lewison and Crowders (in press) predict that under a
moderate case scenario (based on current bycatch of this species in
longline fisheries) this species will experience a 60% decrease in
numbers over the next three generations.This would thus trigger the A3(d)
criterion, calling for this species to be classified as endangered. Any
comment on this assessment, and any other relevant information, would be
greatly appreciated. 
 
Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross: Near Threatened to Critically
Endangered 
 
The Atlantic Yellow-nosed Albatross Thalassarche
chlororhynchos is currently classified as Near Threatened, nearly
meeting criteria A1d, A2d (declines of &gt;30% in 10 years or three
generations). The generation length in this species is estimated to be 22
years (based on data in Cuthbert et al. in prep), so the appropriate
trend period is 66 years. Cuthbert et al. (in prep.) present population
models based on data from 1981-2001 which suggest annual rates of
decrease of up to 2.8% on Gough Island and 5.5% on Tristan da Cunha,
which are most likely to have resulted from low adult and immature
survival, presumed to be caused by fisheries bycatch. The population on
Gough was estimated to be 5,250 pairs in the 2000/2001 breeding season.
The population on Tristan da Cunha was estimated to be 21,600-35,600
pairs in the 1980s but may have declined since then (Richardson 1984,
Fraser et al. 1988, Ryan and Moloney 2000). 
 
Under the A criterion, trends can be estimated over a period in the past
(A2), future (A3), or during a timeframe that encompasses both past and
future (A4). Given that trends are unknown prior to 1982, that the threat
of long-lining is relatively recent, and that it is difficult to predict
the extent of this threat 66 years (three generations) from now, it seems
sensible to use the A4 criterion, and extrapolate known decline rates
into the future to give a total period equivalent to three generations.
The data from Cuthbert et al. (in prep.) have been used to generate the
table in the attached document in order to do this. 
 
This suggests that the total population may therefore decline by 93.8-95%
over the period 1982-2048 (three generations), hence triggering the A4
criterion at the Critical level. Comment on this is welcome, as are
further data relating to population sizes or trends, or to bycatch
mortalities for this species. 
 
Indian Yellow-nosed Albatross: Vulnerable to Endangered 
 
This species is currently classified as Vulnerable due to a 20%
decline over the last 60 years (three generations). Studies indicate that
this decline is likely to continue in the future. New analysis of
generation length reveals that species has a generation length of 23.7
years. This is based on a median age of first breeding of 9 years and an
adult survival rate of 93.2% (extrapolation from the mean of 4
congeners). Three generations is thus ca. 71 years. Published population
trends for the major colonies (attachement) were used to calculate the
global population trend over the next three generations. This reveals a
projected decline in the population of 62% over the next three
generations thus triggering criterion A4 (a), calling for the species to
classified as endangered. These trends are substantiated by known levels
of bycatch of this species in longline fisheries. Indian Yellow-nosed
albatrosses are killed in substantial numbers in at least five longline
fisheries (Nel &amp; Talyor in litt). Any comment on this assessment, and
any other relevant information, would be greatly appreciated. 
 
Black-browed Albatross: Vulnerable to Endangered 
 
This species has recently been upgraded to vulnerable on the basis of
confirmed declines in its major stronghold, the Falkland Islands. From
this, it is inferred that it has declined by c.40% over the last 30 years
(three generations), probably owing to mortality caused by longline
fisheries. There are currently few world sites where it is increasing. It
is therefore inferred to have declined by &gt;30% overall during this
same time period and projected that such declines will continue into the
future. New analysis of generation length reveals that species has a
generation length of 21.5 years (based on a median age of first breeding
of 9 years and an adult survival rate of 92%). Three generations is thus
ca. 65 years. The published population trends for the major colonies
(attachment) were used to calculate the global population trend over the
next three generations. This reveals a projected decline in the
population of 62% over the next three generations thus triggering
criterion A4 (a), calling for the species to classified as endangered.
These trends are substantiated by known levels of exploitation.
Black-browed Albatrosses are one of the most frequently caught species in
at least 21 longline fisheries conducted by 11 different countries (Nel
&amp; Taylor in litt). Furthermore, this species is also vulnerable to
being killed in considerable number in trawl fisheries around the
Falkland Islands (Sullivan pers. comm.). Any comment on this assessment,
and any other relevant information, would be greatly appreciated. 
 
Sooty Shearwater: Least Concern to Vulnerable 
 
The Sooty Shearwater Puffinus griseus is currently listed as
Least Concern. It breeds in New Zealand and satellite islands (c.5
million pairs), Australia (colonies on 17 islands all &lt;1000 pairs),
southern Chile (many colonies, some up to 200,000 pairs) and the
Falklands (10,000=9620,000 pairs). Although this is an extremely numerous
species with a population perhaps exceeding 20 million birds, there are
persistent signs of current decline (information compiled by M. Brooke
for a forthcoming OUP monograph on the family). In New Zealand, the
number of burrows in the largest colony (on the Snares islands) declined
by 37% between 1969-1971 and 1996-2000, and burrow occupancy may also
have declined, indicating that an overall population decline may have
occurred (Warham and Wilson 1982, Scofield 2002). Elsewhere the mainland
New Zealand colonies are in decline and certain offshore colonies have
not responded to predator control (Gaze 2000, Jones 2000). In the
California Current, Sooty Shearwater numbers have fallen by 90% in the
last 20 years (Veit et al. 1996, 1997). It remains uncertain whether this
has resulted from population declines or distributional shifts (Spear and
Ainley 1999). If there is a large-scale decline underway, it is unlikely
to be due to the 'muttonbirding' that currently accounts for around a
quarter of a million of birds annually. Populations are no longer ravaged
by pelagic drift-nets which formerly drowned up to 350,000 birds annually
(Ogi et al. 1993). While the species is killed by fisheries (Taylor
2000), it is not obvious that the mortality is sufficient to account for
the population decrease. It is for this reason that the decline has been
associated with profound climate changes (Veit et al. 1996). If declines
of &gt;30% have been mirrored outside the Snares, then this species would
qualify as Vulnerable (A2b,d; A3b,d). Do such declines seem
reasonable? 
 
Flesh-footed Shearwater: Least Concern to ?: Undergoing declines 
 
Flesh-footed Shearwater Puffinus carneipes is currently
classified as Least Concern. However, recent information from eastern
Australia (B. Baker in litt. 2002) has suggested that bycatch from the
expanding tuna fishery may be significant, with 5,000-6,000 individuals
being killed annually. These birds are likely to have derived from the
Lord Howe island population, which anecdotal reports suggests may have
declined in recent years (alternatively, they may be from populations
breeding in New Zealand, which number 25,000-50,000 pairs). As the total
Lord Howe island population numbers 20,000-40,000 breeding pairs, these
levels of mortality are clearly significant. Fishing effort in western
Australia has also increased in recent years, with unknown effects on
this species (the western population numbers 100,000-200,000 pairs at
&gt;30 colonies). Barry Baker and Brent Wise are currently developing
population models for this species, but information and comment from
other sources would be welcome. 
 
Marbled Murrelet: Vulnerable to Endangered 
 
The Marbled Murrelet Brachyramphus marmoratus is currently
listed as Vulnerable (A1a,b,c,d,e; A2b,c,d,e) because, although it is
still abundant, it has undergone a rapid population decline owing to a
variety of threats. There is some suggestion that large numbers nest in
non-forest areas, and thus are not threatened by logging of old-growth
forest. Estimates of the proportion of the population (or estimates of
numbers of individuals) nesting in non-forest areas are required. The
analysis in 2000 assumed the default trend period of 10 years. However,
generation length in this species is 11.6 years (data from Beissinger
1995 and Cam et al. in prep), yielding a trend period for three
generations of 35 years. In Alaska there was a 50% decline in 1972-1992
(Piatt and Naslund 1995), and a 40% decline in 1982-1992 in parts of
British Columbia (Kelson et al. 1995). Declines in Alaska have continued
since 1991 in Prince William Sound and Glacier Bay (results from models
by B. Manly; K. Kuletz in litt 2002); a decline of 44% (from 80,000 to
53,000 birds) was reported in Prince William Sound in 1996-2000
(Stephensen et al. 2001) [Marine birds and sea otter population abundance
of Prince William Sound, Alaska: trends following the T/V Exxon Valdez
Oil Spill]; and a 30% decline in numbers was found in 1992-2002 along the
Yakutat/Malaspina Forelands (K. Kuletz in litt. 2002). Unfortunately
these data are too incomplete to compile them in order to estimate
complete overall population declines. The four decline rates presented
here, when converted to trends over 35 years, equate to declines of 70%,
72%, 97% and 71%, and hence the species may qualify as Endangered (50-80%
declines over three generations). 
&nbsp; 
[U.S. and Canada have federally listed West Coast populations as
threatened. They nest exclusively in old growth forest in the Pacific
Northwest, which is under intense pressure from logging.] 
 
Kittlitz' murrelet: Least Concern to Critically Endangered 
 
Kittlitz=92s Murrelet Brachyramphus brevirostris is currently
listed as Least Concern (with a global population of 30,000-130,000
individuals estimated in 1996; del hoyo et al. 1996), but its status may
deserve to be elevated based on the following information from K. Kuletz
(in litt. 2002). The Alaskan population (70% of the total) was estimated
to be 9,000-25,000 birds in 2002. It is known to have undergone
population declines in three important population centers: 1) In Prince
William Sound the population declined by 84% between 1989 (6,436 birds)
and 2000 (1,033 birds); 2) In Malaspina Forelands, numbers declined by
38-75% in 1992-2002; In Icy Bay, at the north end of this 80 km stretch
of coast, surveys in 2002 revealed a population of c.2,220 birds; 3) In
Glacier Bay, density estimates for identified brevirostris
declined by 89.1% in 1991-2000, with c.2,200 birds estimated in
1999-2000. There are no trend data from other parts of the species'
range, but anecdotal information suggests population declines are
occurring in at least some of these other areas. Taking the same
generation length as the congeneric Marbled Murrelet B. marmoratus
, the relevant trend period under the IUCN criteria is 35 years. Taking
the three declines listed above, and extrapolating them into the future
to give a trend period of 35 years, yields predicted declines of
99.6-99.9% over 35 years. This would qualify the species as Critical
under criteria A4b,c,d,e, assuming that the Alaskan declines have been
mirrored for the 30% of the population found in Russia. Threats are
hypothesised to include: 1. Habitat loss and degradation due to oceanic
regime shifts and glacial retreat, possibly as a consequence of global
warming; 2. Habitat degradation and repeated disturbance of birds due to
recreational and commercial tour boat traffic; 3. Mortality in gillnet
fisheries (documented in Prince William Sound; anecdotal accounts from
elsewhere; 4. Mortality from petroleum contamination: 500-1,000 (7-15% of
the Prince William Sound population) died as result of the ExxonValdez
oil spill. Comment on this assessment would be welcome. 
 
Long-billed Murrelet: ? 
 
The Long-billed Murrelet Brachyramphus perdix (which breeds in
Japan through the Sea of Okhotsk to the Kamchatka peninsula) was split by
Friesen et al. (1996) [Condor 98: 681-690] from Marbled Murrelet B.
marmoratus (which breeds in California to the Aleutian Islands). The
population is estimated to number in the tens of thousands (Konyukhov and
Kitaysky 1995, from which the following information is taken) [Pp 23-29
in Ralph et al. Ecology and conservation of the Marbled Murrelet]. In
Japan, it is rare in eastern Hokkaido, but commoner on the Sea of Okhotsk
coast, especially near the Shiretoko peninsula. There are few areas in
Russia where the species is considered common: the lower Amur River area,
particularly between Baydukov island and Aleksandra bay; near Magadan
along the Khmitievsky peninsula, Tauyskaya bay, and the Koni peninsula;
and on the Kamchatka peninsula. It appears to be uncommon in the Primorye
region and on Sakhalin island (where its distribution is patchy), and it
is rare on the northern coast of the Sea of Okhotsk. Like Marbled
Murrelet, this species is under increasing threat from logging of old
growth forests which has accelerated in recent years, particularly on
Sakhalin island and the Kamchatka peninsula. Intensive development of the
oil industry has occurred on the Okhotsk and Bering Sea shelves, and this
provides a further potential threat. Assuming the generation length is
the same as in Marbled Murrelet (11.6 years), the appropriate trend
period is 35 years. Should this species be classified as Near Threatened,
almost meeting criteria A2c,e (decline &gt;30% in 35 years) and perhaps
C1 (population &lt;10,000 individuals and decline &gt;10% in 35
years)? 
 
Xantus' Murrelet: Vulnerable to ? 
 
Xantus's Murrelet Synthliboramphus hypoleucus is currently
listed as Vulnerable (B1+2d,e; C1) because it has a small range (Extent
of Occurrence =3D 300 km2), and because it has a small population (5,600
individuals) which is declining. Conservation action is beginning to have
some positive effects as introduced predators are eradicated from
colonies. What is the latest population estimate for this species? Have
any sites been recolonised, or new colonies discovered? 
 
Red-legged Kittiwake: Vulnerable to ? 
 
The Red-legged Kittiwake Rissa brevirostris is currently
listed as Vulnerable (A1a) owing to a rapid decline from 259,000
individuals in the mid 1970s to c.168,000 in the mid-1990s. The main
population now seems to have stabilised (Dragoo et al. 2000, 2001)
[Breeding status and population trends of seabirds in Alaska in 1999;
ditto 2000]. In 2000 it was recommended that if declines do not
recommence, then this species should be downlisted to Near Threatened.
However, the analysis in 2000 used the default trend period of 10 years
under the IUCN criteria. Generation length in the congeneric Black-legged
Kitiwake R. tridactyla is 14 years (mean age at first breeding =3D 4
years; mean annual survival =3D 90.5%), giving a trend period of 42 years.
Assuming that the population had been stable prior to the mid-1970s, the
overall decline over this period is 35.2%. Hence the species would still
qualify as Vulnerable (A2b) under the revised IUCN criteria, and would
remain so for quite some time into the future. The key issue is
therefore: can age at first breeding and annual survival for Black-legged
Kittiwake be extrapolated to this species? 
 
 
<x-sigsep></x-sigsep>
Elizabeth Mitchell 
P.O. Box 933 
Eugene, Oregon 97440 
U.S.A. 
Tel: 541/ 935-0858 
Message Tel: 541/344-5503 
E-mail: emitch@efn.org 
 
 
 
 
 
&nbsp;</html>

--=====================_26637343==_.ALT--